Private Charities
In the private sector you need to know what cancer charities are doing with the money they receive and how much of it is going into meaningful research.
In 2013 the Charity Navigator reviewed the financial health of over two dozen of the largest charities working to fight and prevent breast cancer in America.5
Although these charities have been very successful in generating support, together raising nearly $1.7 billion annually in contributions, the disparity in their financial transparency and effectiveness is enormous.
The good news is that several of these charities efficiently utilize donations to pursue their mission. However, others will astound donors with their inefficient operations and low marks for accountability & transparency. For example, one charity spends less than 2% of its budget on fund raising expenses, while another spends nearly 98%. Many of these charities spend at least 80% of their budgets on programs and services, while four spend less than 50%. And while more than half of them earn high ratings for their commitment to accountability & transparency,
three of them earn 0-stars and two earn just 1-star in this area.
Before contributing to any charity, it's advisable to look into their management through organizations that evaluate their transparency and effectiveness, such as the Charity Navigator, Greatnonprofits and the BBB Wise Giving Alliance.
The Public Sector
In Clinical Cancer Advances 2013: Annual Report on Progress Against Cancer by the American Society of Clinical Oncology,6 President Clifford A. Hudis said that "our position as a world leader in advancing medical knowledge and our ability to attract the most promising and talented investigators are now threatened by an acute problem. Federal funding for cancer research has steadily eroded over the past
decade, and only 15% of the ever-shrinking budget is actually spent on clinical trials. This dismal reality threatens the pace of progress against cancer and undermines our ability to address the continuing needs of our patients."
The American Society of Clinical Oncology is providing the scientific and clinical leadership needed. Dr. Harold Varmus, Director of the National Cancer Institute, is committed to providing the vision and the funding directions that are needed to "change the conversation" about cancer.
In his book Reinventing American Health Care: How the Affordable Care Act will Improve our Terribly Complex, Blatantly Unjust, Outrageously Expensive, Grossly Inefficient, Error Prone System, Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, professor of medical ethics and health policy at the University of Pennsylvania, sorts out the complexities of the background, development, political wrangling and legal journey of the Affordable Care Act and describes its potential for improving our health care system.7
In the public sector we all need to put pressure on our elected representatives to fund sensible research. Those of us who are receiving cancer treatment now—over 13.7 million—and our caregivers have a compelling incentive to become politically active. We must inform the rest of the nation that one in three of us will ultimately die from cancer and that the costs of cancer care affect all of us. Our environment and life styles are the principal causes of cancer.8 Inherited genetic factors play a minor role most types of cancer.
Advocacy in cancer care and prevention has played a major role in improving cancer control and care all over the world.9 Organizations devoted to specific forms of cancer have moved from local, regional and national to global coalitions and federations. They all stress the need for persons with cancer and their caregivers to be involved in the challenges of cancer care and its improvement at policy and resource development levels.
Bringing about the improvement of cancer requires public demand and lobbying by individuals and advocacy organizations.
In fact, there is no greater potential constituency for producing the political will for change than the War on Cancer can muster if properly directed. "Walk for cancer," "run for cancer," "cycle for cancer" are slogans that could generate popular support for changing the focus from killing cancer cells to preventing and stopping neoplasia. The desire is there. The energy is there. The money is there.
What's missing is dedicated and effective leadership to make the War on Cancer one that we can win. Good intentions and appeals to charitable impulses are not enough.
In the private sector you need to know what cancer charities are doing with the money they receive and how much of it is going into meaningful research.
In 2013 the Charity Navigator reviewed the financial health of over two dozen of the largest charities working to fight and prevent breast cancer in America.5
Although these charities have been very successful in generating support, together raising nearly $1.7 billion annually in contributions, the disparity in their financial transparency and effectiveness is enormous.
The good news is that several of these charities efficiently utilize donations to pursue their mission. However, others will astound donors with their inefficient operations and low marks for accountability & transparency. For example, one charity spends less than 2% of its budget on fund raising expenses, while another spends nearly 98%. Many of these charities spend at least 80% of their budgets on programs and services, while four spend less than 50%. And while more than half of them earn high ratings for their commitment to accountability & transparency,
three of them earn 0-stars and two earn just 1-star in this area.
Before contributing to any charity, it's advisable to look into their management through organizations that evaluate their transparency and effectiveness, such as the Charity Navigator, Greatnonprofits and the BBB Wise Giving Alliance.
The Public Sector
In Clinical Cancer Advances 2013: Annual Report on Progress Against Cancer by the American Society of Clinical Oncology,6 President Clifford A. Hudis said that "our position as a world leader in advancing medical knowledge and our ability to attract the most promising and talented investigators are now threatened by an acute problem. Federal funding for cancer research has steadily eroded over the past
decade, and only 15% of the ever-shrinking budget is actually spent on clinical trials. This dismal reality threatens the pace of progress against cancer and undermines our ability to address the continuing needs of our patients."
The American Society of Clinical Oncology is providing the scientific and clinical leadership needed. Dr. Harold Varmus, Director of the National Cancer Institute, is committed to providing the vision and the funding directions that are needed to "change the conversation" about cancer.
In his book Reinventing American Health Care: How the Affordable Care Act will Improve our Terribly Complex, Blatantly Unjust, Outrageously Expensive, Grossly Inefficient, Error Prone System, Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, professor of medical ethics and health policy at the University of Pennsylvania, sorts out the complexities of the background, development, political wrangling and legal journey of the Affordable Care Act and describes its potential for improving our health care system.7
In the public sector we all need to put pressure on our elected representatives to fund sensible research. Those of us who are receiving cancer treatment now—over 13.7 million—and our caregivers have a compelling incentive to become politically active. We must inform the rest of the nation that one in three of us will ultimately die from cancer and that the costs of cancer care affect all of us. Our environment and life styles are the principal causes of cancer.8 Inherited genetic factors play a minor role most types of cancer.
Advocacy in cancer care and prevention has played a major role in improving cancer control and care all over the world.9 Organizations devoted to specific forms of cancer have moved from local, regional and national to global coalitions and federations. They all stress the need for persons with cancer and their caregivers to be involved in the challenges of cancer care and its improvement at policy and resource development levels.
Bringing about the improvement of cancer requires public demand and lobbying by individuals and advocacy organizations.
In fact, there is no greater potential constituency for producing the political will for change than the War on Cancer can muster if properly directed. "Walk for cancer," "run for cancer," "cycle for cancer" are slogans that could generate popular support for changing the focus from killing cancer cells to preventing and stopping neoplasia. The desire is there. The energy is there. The money is there.
What's missing is dedicated and effective leadership to make the War on Cancer one that we can win. Good intentions and appeals to charitable impulses are not enough.
hi Lestari, apa kabar ? :)
ReplyDelete